From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 23:20:01 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, Stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: WTF: patch "[PATCH] iio: fix kernel-doc build errors" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 4.14-stable tree? Message-ID: <20171211222001.GA22320@kroah.com> References: <151302684086214@kroah.com> <3e027e38-624d-3b44-5143-01d2fe63fc6e@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3e027e38-624d-3b44-5143-01d2fe63fc6e@infradead.org> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 02:02:18PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 12/11/2017 01:14 PM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 4.14-stable tree. > > > > I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst. > > > > I could be totally wrong, and if so, please respond to > > and let me know why this patch should be > > applied. Otherwise, it is now dropped from my patch queues, never to be > > seen again. > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > Mind you, I'm not pushing for its inclusion in -stable, but I would say that > it meets all of the rules listed for inclusion, depending on how loosely or > how strongly one interprets some of the wording there. "Normal" build warnings/errors are great to fix, but documentation build warnings are things I've never fixed for the stable trees before. thanks, greg k-h